You Should Never Despise Your Enemy

We are, after all, all Americans. We are brothers and sisters living in a land pioneered by a tough, compassionate people compelled by the desire of a life free from tyranny. Presently, we are trapped in the tyranny of our own hatred of one another. We have become a nation where intellectual debate and rational reactions are obsolete.

Diverse opinions are rich and viable if they can be steeped in an avenue that leads to productivity. We, as a nation, are stuck in the mire of “me first” and “my way.” We cannot survive as a nation with such selfish divisiveness. We must not despise our enemies. We need to respect our fellow Americans’ desires and opinions without despicable behavior.

Love our enemies as we love ourselves. Respect our differences as we celebrate our similarities. Resolve our vivid and vast ideologies with a compassion bred by a shared heritage — we are all Americans. Forging the streams that concurrently challenge our differences is the bridge upon which we build our future. Acceptance of our uniqueness with a resolve to find commonalities is our only chance for survival.

Ironically, our enemies are within our own borders, as we are our own worst enemy. The resentments that reside in our hearts will ruin our resolve to be the people God made us to be, upholding the country God gave us to keep. America is a treasure. The America that is the hope of all mankind is best represented by a man that is kind. May we not shatter ourselves with shameless ego.

During an election year ripe with divisions that cultivate civic war, may we not forget our national character. May we not despise our enemies but nourish our freedoms to be unique, culminating in an America that is steadied by her rudder of reason.

91 Comments, 52 Threads

1.
bianchi_roadie

“Respect our differences as we celebrate our similarities.”

Good luck with that. Our current culture has dumbed down civics to the point that the media and discussion is on the level with sport – one side must win and the other lose. There is no compromise or rational debate if the only recorded outcome at the end is which side “won” or “scored points”.

It also doesn’t help that the most partisans are taught to believe that their opponents are not incorrect or misguided but actually evil. That is, their opponents are choosing to act in harming others. That then justifies any harm you may cause them – fighting evil justifies evil actions.

“Love your enemies and pray for them that persecute you…”,Mt.6.44.
We not only pray for those who persecute us; but, because we choose to love them, we do all we can to convince them to shape up and fly right. If they don’t, they will suffer eternal punishment. Loving them, we certainly don’t want them to meet that fate. So we try to convert them, “becoming all things to all men that I might save some”, as Apostle Paul said. They may not enjoy the conversion process, which may well include incarceration designed to bring them to repentance; thus the “penitentiary”. We may not compromise the Truth for any reason or rationale.As Aunt Stella said, “There ain’t no right way to do wrong.” We do not frustrate, punish or correct them because we hate them; but because we love them and want to see them get right with God.

Bravo – Well said, and well meant. Unfortunately, some will say “well, they did it first”. While I believe that we must push back against the Alinsky-inspired progressive, we should not lose sight that we are still all in this together. May our better angels prevail.

Just last week, Mark Halperin called for a truce. And now here you are with “can’t we all just get along?”. My I remind you that early in Obama’s term, he looked Sen McCain in the eye and said, “There was an election John. We won. You lost.”

I’m sorry but the left is at war with us. The sooner we recognize that the better off we will be. I suggest you read Ion Mihai Pacepa’s recent column right here on PJM.

Oh good grief YES! We are certainly at war with them (liberals) even if we don’t acknowledge it like this country didn’t acknowledge the fact that islam is at war with us!

These people HATE us and DO think we are evil while refusing to see the evil in every one of their actions. Even ignoring the evil that happens in other countries that utilize their policies, they continue to still believe that things will be different when THEY take full control.

Somehow they don’t GET that they ARE in control and are already in the mode that they actually HATE the fact that we still draw air and are in the process of justifying some way to change that – just like all their predessesors.

I’m so tired of the communist/democrats refusing
to give an inch even when presented with overwhelming
simple reason that the only conclusion that can now be
drawn is that they truly seek the destruction of every
constitutional fiber holding this nation together.
The time for talk is over, I say let’s DANCE.

When one side just wants to be left alone and the other wants to enslave them, it is no time to compromise or “get along”.
It is time to utterly vanquish them, so that we may be left alone in the future.
They have proven that they will lie, cheat, steal, and enslave to get their way. They do not love you. They only wish to destroy you.
This is War!

Despite 8 years of the Sisters of St. Joseph, each one of them saints, and 4 years of the Jesuits, no saints but all quite brilliant men, I cannot even pretend to be as good a follower of the Prince of Peace as Janine well articulates.

Here’s the problem, Janine: all of America’s problems are self inflicted, arguably with malice aforethought, inarguably through willful ignorance. Those with the malice, or with the willful ignorance, deserved to be loved as per the Prince of Peace, but I would prefer them to first lose the malice and rectify the ignorance.

Remember, Janine, only one of the two thieves was told “this night you will be with me in Paradise”. The other, recalcitrant, bitter, taunting thief, didn’t get that promise.

You are right, Frank…Christ did not say the same thing to Gesmas. But since He is the Son of God, that is His privelege. I am a Roman Catholic and we are always admonished to “…hate the sin but love the sinner”. It isn’t easy, but we cannot call ourselves Christian if we behave like they do.

The colonials were divided back then at least as much as now since the loyalists were fighting on the side of the British, supporting the King, reporting rebel sympathizers to the British Army, selling supplies to the British Army. You can’t get much more divided than that.

After the British gave up the fight, loyalists had to leave the country. Some went to Canada, others back to England.

The Revolution was much more a civil war than our civil war. The revolution truly DID divide households hile the civil war went along geograhical lines with hardly any defections on either side.

I believe we are THAT devided this time – with irreconcilable differences dividing both households and entire families. I know people who will not speak to a family member because of these differences.

I used to think we could live and let live, but have come to the sadc conclusion that we can’t. I would really like to avoid a confrontation like the civil war and would now happily divide the country in an amicable divorce.
Just draw the lines and I’ll move if I have to. Let them have their freakin utopia!

Janine, thank you for a call to unity. What is required of statists is hatred and bitterness. THAT’s NOT America!!!!! We cannot allow ourselves to be divided … it’s what the enemy desires.
As much as I despise Obama’s policies … I hope that I can still love the man, and NOT succumb to hating him.
Everyone that wants our country to succeed has to recognize the divisive rhetoric of this administration and reject it wholeheartedly. We are Americans and WE don’t succumb to leftist clap trap like other nations have. What hope can we give the world if we follow in their footsteps?

If you despise Obama’s policies, you must despise the man. He is at one with his policies. His policies are a reflection of the man. The man and his policies are one.

When you compromise your beliefs, when you give your enemy the substance of love, then you are on the way to defeat. You must hate your enemy, for he is your enemy. He will give you no quarter, for what he does, he does for your own good. He will gladly let you compromise, for he sees in compromise a victory, a small one, possibly, but he knows that the next compromise will bring him closer to his goal, while you move further from yours. You may think you and your enemy have reached a ‘middle ground’ satisfactory to you both, but, again, your enemy will move forward and extract another compromise until there is no room for compromise; you have lost, and you retain only the good opinion of yourself, while your enemy thinks of you as the fool.

Conservatives need to remember that when we negotiate, we must start anew at the original concept, not at the point where the compromise was made. Otherwise we will compromise ourselves out of existence. Who knows, we may someday wake to the news that the Supreme Court has declared the Constitution unconstitutional.

They are treated like enemies because they are. What else do you call people who would steal your money, take away your rights, dictate where you live, go to school, what to think, all while openly expressing their distain and contempt for you. There is nothing constructive in not recognizing those who would deliberately do you harm, for their own gain, as enemies.

A general dissolution of principles and manners will more surely overthrow the liberties of America than the whole force of the common enemy. While the people are virtuous they cannot be subdued; but once they lose their virtue they will be ready to surrender their liberties to the first external or internal invader. –Samuel Adams, 1779. Unfortunately today people tend to equate education and intelligence with wisdom. There is a serious lack of wisdom in the progressive movement.

news flash! the only people saying lib’s are more intelligent than other people are lib’s. also, i know from experience, in college and the workplace, that degrees awarded under the stench of affirmative action, don’t really count as being on a level with real degrees earned. many times, the only reason they are even hired is because of the quota requirements.

I can certainly understand the reason for this article. Having just listened to Joy Behar talk about her new show (shudder, I’ll have to listen to foul rap music just to get memories of her voice out of my mind) we deinitely are in a very uncivil war with the left.

The problem is, if you play nice, the other side will not. That is why we ended up with Roe vs. Wade. Why we ended up with Obama instead of McCain. Why we ended up with Obamacare. Why the MSM continues to lie and cover for Obama instead of telling the truth (as we see it).

Perhaps the idea is not to be mean or hateful, but by no means lie down and take the crap from them. We’ve been doing that for way too long. Some liberals are okay, some even mean well (though they are terribly misguided). Most leftists, however, are despicable. Nothing is too bad if it means they will win.

There are at least two problems with your cry for civility. First, any civilized society will fall to barbarians if they fail to recognize that the barbarians are, in fact, barbarians who have nothing in common with civilization. Second, politics has always been a visceral activity. It’s driven by emotion and is thus inherently irrational. If you counter emotion with logic and reason you’ll lose every emotional argument and, consequently, every election. That problem is further compounded when you lack an ideological core with every action guided by principle.

The only way that we’re going to reduce the rhetoric is by reducing the importance of government… and neither party has shown any interest in doing that.

I don’t know how exactly how it took for the democrat party to be completely taken over by the communists (I think the last real democrat was Zell Miller) but we no longer have a communist party because even they know the democrats are them.

The Tea Party is the answer to the GOP. The principles of the Tea Party are what we want (small government conservatism) and I don’t know how long it might take (I hope not too long) but we have to do what the communists did – take them over because a third party is just not feasible in this country.

Yes, let’s all get together for a group hug. Don’t make me sick. We ARE in the middle of a civil war right now and the winner of that war will determine the political direction of this country. Do we follow the path of the European-style social-welfare states, as Obama and the liberals want us to, or do we drive a stake into the heart of liberalism and socialism and save what’s left of this Constitutional Republic?

I think that it’s a tribute to our nation’s maturity that this war IS being fought on TV, on the Internet, on the radio, and in the voting booths. Just think how many lives would have been saved during America’s great Civil War if instead of armies we used newspapers, and instead of bullets we used words. And let’s not even talk about what media was like in George Washington’s time. The newspapers back then were far more vicious than anything we see or hear today (with the possible exception of the trash that’s on MSNBC).

So lay off the touchy-feely stuff, OK? The liberals are going to give us no quarter, as was amply demonstrated when Obama won in 2008. As Obama famously said to John McCain, “I won and elections do have consequences.” Indeed they do, as we can see four years later. Reid and Pelosi also showed just how interested they were in working in a “bipartisan” way from 2008 to 2010, when they were killed in the midterm elections.

So stop the Dr. Phil stuff. This is open warfare with a bunch of people who would think nothing of spending this country into oblivion and laugh at you while they did it. We must stand up to these creatures and it certainly would be work people like John Adams and James Madison would expect from us. We can’t go through life anymore saying, “Well, let’s just agree to disagree.” Government doesn’t work that way. There are winners and losers, and we all saw what happened when good, thinking, people lost in 2008. Never again. As James Carville always used to say back in 1994, “It’s hard for the other guy to come after you when you have your fist in their face.” You want to reason with people like that? Give me a break.

I don’t think anyone is disagreeing with you there; there is no reasoning with the left so it seems. I took this as a warning NOT to get suckered into hating our fellow Americans. We all despise the left and its hatred of all things free … and we must fight to win; with the “love your neighbor as yourself” in mind.
That’s the high road; which I admit, is tough to take … I just as soon nuke the b’tards!!!

Moron! You are peddlers of emotions. You use the right keywords to encite riots. Then…..! When you get the response you wish to exploit…….BOOM! You POUNCE!……With MORE key words to exploit the response!

I almost take that back – they don’t want to kill some of us. They want us enslaved. Wage-slaves. Working to feed their re-distributative machine. However, they will kill they hard cases that refuse to be enslaved.

It is war, and split my family decades ago. My brilliant 6’2″ brother, a utopian since his days on a Tennessee commune, has been sneering at the rest of us for 40 years.

But here’s the problem: When a high-IQ person adopts a utopian way of thinking, he will eventually encounter reality. This causes immense psychological chaos: either he made a mistake, which the “gifted” person will not EVER concede, or the people who disprove his theory are destroyers of his personal peace.

Disappointed utopian thinkers could be quite disruptive to society, especially if they got the power to COERCE others to do what they say is “a good”. I think my brother would be quite happy if the people who refuse to knuckle under to “best practices” were made to suffer in some way. I do not think the atrocities of the 20th century totalitarian systems are at all surprising if you consider that nearly all of the perps did it for “the good” of the nation.

I suspect that if the left pushes us into a Euro-type state-run society, with its concommitant group-thought, and promotes non-Western cultures to disrupt what binds us together, we may see traditional American thought as unwelcome in the workplace.

This election DOES matter, a great deal. To give leftist ideologues eight years to give bad reviews to Civil Service employees who actually do their jobs, and replace them with radicals – it’s horrifying. And don’t forget our military – which might be fundamentally altered in every important way.

I love the face that you mentioned constitutionalists vs. progressives. Because when all is said and done, that is the real war. And “Progressivism” is the UNDOING of the Constitution and should never have been allowed to “progress” as far as it did. That is what the real fight is about. Simply put. It is about Freedom vs. Fascism. Any variation of left wing idealogy is authoritarian and totalitarian to varying degrees. Read the Communist Manifesto and see how far we have “progressed”. And if you think I and others like me plan to dial down the rhetoric, you’ve got another thought coming. It is precisely because we have said nothing, or offered meager reistance for so long, that the country is being devoured by the left. And we won’t stand for it anymore. Get used to the shouting. Because shouting is better than shooting. At least for now.

Incremental steps – bit by bit – and we have been reasoned away (oh no! that would NEVER happen!)! Cajoled! Ridiculed and now simply dismissed.

Now they are at the point that we are bat-shit-crazy if we object to a cross being reomoved from a WWI or WWII memorial. Or Christmas songs being sung at a Christmas Pageant at a school! GOD FORBID!!! We have lawsuits about the Pledge of Allegiance! About having In God We Trust on our money!

Love my enemies? Never. They need to be annihilated. This talk of a unified America is absurd. My enemies seek to destroy America (they may have already succeeded). How does one love and compromise with that?

Well, I do despise my enemies and I don’t intend for that to change. We are not “all Americans” except as a legal matter. We have large groups of people in this Country who despise the Country and the things for which it stands, some out of a willful, informed malevolence towards the US, some because they are simply brainwashed useful idiots, some because they’re simply ignorant parasites that depend on the left and its front groups for sustenance.

I spent twenty years representing a public employer in its dealings with unionized public employees. The first few years were old-fashioned collective bargaining with old-fashioned unions. From ’88 on, it was dealing with out and out communists, some of whom knew they were communists, and collective bargaining just became politics by other means. I learned quickly that those people viscerally hated me; gone were the days of a drink with the union rep at the end of a day in arbitration or at the bargaining table. After awhile, I learned to hate them, learned to do stuff to them just because I could, and they reciprocated. They put a price on my head at elections, I used my influence with the Legislature to kill their contracts, investigate their leaders, and thwart their initiatives – even the ones that might have been a good idea. They wouldn’t let the employer do anything good or anything they couldn’t claim credit for, and we returned the favor. The modern left are not people with whom you can do business. You cannot make a good faith agreement with them because they will not honor any agreement if they think they have the power to abbrogate it and get away with it. The only thing they understand is force and violence. In that sense, they’ll like many young boys; they have no respect for anything or anyone but can be brought into compliance with the threat of pain – that’s all they understand, and when they ask you to reach out your hand to them, it’s because you’re still too far away to bite.

If politics was played like a sporting event, as long as each side played within the rules and the arbiters (refs, umpires) were legitimate and objective, I would indeed play within those rules, competing with all the skills I could bring to bear, but not harboring any enmity at the opposing team or those wearing their uniforms.

If, however, the rules are tossed to the wind and the arbiters are liars, cheats, distortionists, propagandists, then I have no interest in playing a rigged game where the fix is in.

Perhaps more importantly, if it is not merely a contest to debate the best way to advance our nation, but rather, a stealth attempt to overthrow our nation, then how am I to treat a traitor?

Adams and Jefferson could debate, but nobody was interested in a debate with Benedict Arnold. There is a line across which I am not willing to give “loyal opposition” status. When the opposition is disloyal, it cannot be treated as anything but beneath contempt.

One may argue (as Bill O’Reilly does) that Obama is not a Marxist and has not crossed that line, he is simply a “very liberal guy”. Anyone reading the account of his entire life from Frank Marshall Davis mentoring, to the radical professors at college, to the Socialist Scholars convention, to the Midwest Academy, to the New Party, to Bill Ayers, to the James L. Cone/Jeremiah Wright pews…this man is steeped in radical Marxism.

Since I don’t believe O’Reilly is myopic or too dense to comprehend, he must be spectacularly uninformed.

For my part, I would even debate radical leftism, communism or any other deranged notion, if the proponent would come out into the open and debate their side transparently with honest conviction.

Giving us small c communism in a government by ambush isn’t worthy of debate. It’s an overthrow attempt in that case and is worthy of exposure, resistance and contempt.

This is why I make a huge distinction between liberals and radical leftists…and I’m on record repeatedly doing so. I will do precisely what you suggest here with a liberal, any time. That’s not who we are dealing with any longer, however. The radical leftists swallowed them whole. And only pretend they are liberals. For them, I have nothing but contempt.

I disagree that “we are all in this together.” We may live in the same country but our objectives are mutually exclusive and in fundamental contradiction. And, I’ll just point out that it is the low-conflict side that puts the fate of the country above their personal agenda, while the high-conflict side is happy to burn the country to the ground to win.

Liberals want to rule the world and conservatives want to be left alone. Liberals seep into every organization and venue and attempt to take over, while conservatives hide from conflict. Just look at conservative students in class, members in unions, and teachers. They hide.

Remember, in the story of Solomon and the two mothers. It was the real mother that surrendered her claim to save her baby. The other mother was ready to have the baby bisected.

The remaining liberals are the ones that are determined to ignore the most reality to remain liberal. The remaining liberals are like Typhoid Mary. They refuse to hear the warnings they are spreading disease. They think if only they try to help no harm can come from that help. The “nice” liberals are not making decisions and the radicals don’t listen to the “nice” liberals they practice scorched earth Alinsky tactics

Ok – so then the end of the Cold War happened……and then what? Did the left give up? Noooooooooo! They splintered into directions that have still managed to coalescent into a wedge that has fractured and divide this country into a mess. Oh – all to one purpose – but they are better organized than we are. Point here – distract there! Shoot! We are still (after ALL these years) running around trying to answer their attacks! Answer their accusations (all false, of course!) but still coming out the losers in the media war of opinion! And yet we still think we can compromise with these people.

It’s time to throw in the towel and just say: You believe in this….you live here! You belive in that …….you live there! Period. Done! Do It!

I don’t think the Right is so much dispising the left as much as they are responding the the treatment they’ve been receiving for so long.

I can remember the Isolation I used to feel in the days before Rush Limbaugh was on the air. I really did feel I was completely out of step with the world. I’ll never forget the Saturday when a friend came in the house and said to me, “Hey, John, there’s a guy on the Radio that talks just like you do.”

Until then, I’d suffered many indignities for my beliefs and was told there was something wrong with me. Even after Rush was on the air and I knew I was not alone, the tone and tennor of Lefitst beratement stepped up concurrant.

It’s no different than Republicans responding to Obama’s “I Won” something the left conveniently forgets when accusing the Right of not cooperating with obama. To them cooperate means roll over and capitulate, not negotiate and work toward a solution.

For years, the right has been accused of HATE for the simple act of Not Agreeing, there comes a point when you may feel it’s time that if I’m going to be accused, I may as well indulge.

Frustration is not the same thing as HATE, but it may look alike in the current environment.

I strongly recommend Lee Harris’ Civilization and Its Enemies. Here’s a bit from the preface…

The subject of this book is forgetfulness.

By this I do not mean our tendency to misplace valuable objects, or our inability to recall the name of the boss’s dog, but the collective and cultural amnesia the over comes any group of human beings who have long benefited from the blessings of civilization – an amnesia first observed nearly eight hundred years ago by the Arab philosopher of history Ibn Khaldun, contemplating the rise and fall of those great feats of organized life that we call by such terms as societies, states and empires.

Forgetfulness occurs when those who have been long accustomed to civilized order can no longer remember a time in which they had to wonder whether their crops would grow to maturity without being stole or whether their children would be sold into slavery by a victorious foe. Even then it is necessary for parents, and even grandparents, to have forgotten as well, so that there is no living link between the tranquility of the present generation and those dismal periods in which the world behaved very much in accordance with the rules governing Thomas Hobbes’ state of nature, where human life was “solitary, poore, nasty, brutish and short.” When parents have forgotten what that world was like, they can hardly be expected to teach their children how it was or what one had to do in order to survive in it.

Civilized people forget that in order to produce a civilization there must be what German sociologist Norbert Elias has called “the civilizing process,” and that this process, if it is to be successful, must begin virtually at our birth, and hence many long years before the child can have any say about the kind of training that he would have preferred. They forget that the civilizing process we undergo must duplicate that of our neighbors, if we are to understand each other in our day-to0-day intercourse. If you are taught to spit at a man who offers to shake your hand, and do when I offer mine, we will not easily get along.

Civilized people forget how much work it is not to kill one’s neighbors, simply because this work was done by our ancestors so that it could be willed to us as an heirloom. They forget that in time of danger, in the face of the enemy, they must trust and confide in each other, or perish. They forget that to fight an enemy it is necessary to have a leader whom you trust, and how, at such times, this trust is a civic duty and not evidence of one’s credulity. They forget, in short, that there has ever been a category of human experience called the enemy.

It’s certainly a fair point, and one which comes with a flexible and charitable mind. Some people are very wrong about the function of government. As conservatives but also humans, we are also not absolutely certain of everything, nor do we all agree on everything. Charity of soul is necessary no matter what. Certainly a distinct P.O.V. Ms. Turner.

You show me the Occupancy Leader who respects my positions and beliefs and who will not strip me of my freedoms if unopposed and we may have room to talk.

You show me a Leftist who will leave my freedoms and liberties intact if left unopposed and we may have room to talk.

You show me a Democrat that will pass only colorblind laws and a Justice System that is totally colorblind in their enforcement of colorblind law and we may have room to talk.

You show me the environmentalist and animal rights movement that is not based on emotional use of lies and exaggerations to de-industrialize my world that will result in a subsistence level existence for my kids and grandkids and we may have room to talk.

You show me a Leftist that does not “feel” entitled to any amount of my earnings that they think is “fair”, and we may have room to talk.

Failing to find those conditions coupled with the Left’s drive to subjugate the American citizens to total government control, those leading the charge and anyone who supports or enables them are far more than “the opposition”. In no uncertain terms “They are the enemy” of individual freedom and liberty and everything that I hold dear and true. It makes no difference to me if the enemy is foreign or domestic. Anyone whose goals, if achieved, result in the destruction of my nation is my enemy.

I make no apologies for viewing and treating them for what they are. “The enemy”

When I was but a youth, a wiser old man advised me to “Love your enemies! It will confuse the Hell out of them.”

Looking back with a seventy plus year perspective, he was more right than he knew. On more than one occasion I have rewarded despicable treatment towards me and my family with a totally undeserved act of kindness and consideration. Let confusion reign!

right. this is the favored weapon of our Lord. if your enemy gives you the opening, the best way to vanquish him is to “turn the other cheek.” this will shock him and make him think. if given the opportunity, the best way to reach an enemy is to treat him as you would be treated. if possible, treat him as well as he has abused you.

as sun tzu said (paraphrasing), the best way to win a war is to arrange the conflict in such a way as not to come to blows.

To finish the story is a very brief narration. My older brother, by three years, was having trouble with his first grade classmates and doting mother reiterated the ‘other cheek’ story but that did not change the situation. When she called in father, an Army Officer, he did the routine ‘don’t start any fights, but if someone else does, well then defend yourself,’ A few days later big brother got off the school bus smiling a mile wide, “I can beat up any kid up to the THIRD GRADE!”

It’s a political civil war — a civics war — a war of politics and ideology.

With all due respect, all real civil wars are preceded by a political civil war. We are in that stage. There is already the political split between different groups of Americans, and there is already no longer any basis of common ground between us. It is not purely a matter of Democrat -v- Republican, if only because the Institutional Republicans who run the party are quite content to go along with the Democrats in their actions so long as their place at the trough is preserved.

I refer to the “other side” as TWANLOC; i.e. Those Who Are No Longer Our Countrymen. We no longer speak the same language, have the same view of our history, share a common world-view and culture, and share a view of the sovereignty of our country within our borders. Those gaps are a bridge too far.

We are beyond compromise. One side or another will have to be defeated as in 1783 and 1865. There is no surety of honest, fair, free elections in November; as TWANLOC are doing their best to destroy the election process. Even if they lose, there is no guarantee that they will honor the results. Clausewitz’ equation may be invoked at any time.

To operate on the assumption that those who are destroying the rule of law and dismantling the Constitution are operating with goodwill and honesty is to surrender everything that we value.

Calls for Christian charity do not move me as much as they may move others. I am not Christian. My loyalty is to the Constitution, and my Oath to preserve, protect, and defend it. I suspect that those who have taken that same Oath will be called to honor it due to the actions of those I call TWANLOC.

They have freedom of choice in their actions. They do not have freedom of consequences.

Yes, the Constitution of 1787 “supported” slavery in that it did not immediately end it. That was part of the Grand Compromise that allowed the Constitution to be ratified. They kicked the can down the road, at least until sometime after 1808 [see Article I Section 9] and actually farther. But that was not the only difference between the North and South; nor was it the only cause for the war. It was, however, what was eventually accepted as the superficial reason for the war.

The differences between the North and South, before the Revolution, were vast. Consider the settlers of each. In the North, it was settled by descendents of Puritans and Parliamentarians from the English Civil Wars, and Germans. The South was settled by Royalists and Celts. Very different cultures, very different world views. Some of the cultural differences actually predate the English Civil Wars, and go back to the Saxon invasions of Britain. Look at the names of the Colonies, later states. South of the Mason-Dixon line, the original Colonies were named after royalty. Virginia, being Elizabeth the “Virgin Queen”. Maryland, Queen Mary. Both Carolina’s, King Charles [in Latin], Georgia, King George. Delaware, after the first Royal Governor Thomas West, 3rd Baron De La Warr.

Besides the Celtic-Saxon differences, there were vast economic differences. The relatively temperate climate and well watered topography of the southern coastal plain encouraged large monoculture crops for export [tobacco and cotton]. These were labor intensive and profitable with slavery. In the North, while slavery existed [and the whole institution in America could not have existed at all without the active support and profits made by New England investors and shippers (see "slave trade triangle")] in the North for personal servitude, the North and away from the southern coastal plain were not suitable for plantations.

The South, from its founding on, was largely agricultural. This was by necessity. The Northern economy developed both agriculture based on small holdings, and an urban life that encouraged manufactures. This was key to the conflict to come, in large part because of the Constitution.

I draw your attention to the original text of the Constitution. The only taxes collected were either excise taxes [such as on alcohol] which were minimal or import duties. The North was self sufficient in both food and manufactured goods. The South had an export oriented agriculture and no real manufactures.

In these days of instant online trading, it is hard to understand the limitations they dealt with in those days.

1. There was little demand for Southern crops in the North. And the prices they would pay for cotton, tobacco, etc. were far less than could be made by exporting it to Europe.

2. Therefore, they sold their crops overseas, getting paid once a year when it was delivered.

3. They were paid overseas. Because it was neither safe nor insurable to ship specie from Europe to the US, and because bills of credit were not as developed as today when we can move billions of dollars with a couple of keystrokes, they left their payments in European banks, and drew upon the accounts there to purchase European manufactured goods to be shipped home. These goods could be insured in transit.

4. When the goods arrived in the US, they were subject to import duties. Before the beginning of the Civil War, 85% of US tax revenue was from the South, mostly import duties. We did NOT have our first income tax until the Civil War began, and never have had a Federal head tax.

5. Slavery was what inflamed public opinion, but much of the argument over slave -v- free states had the subtext of who had the majority in Congress to control the spending of tax money that came from the South. The North won that battle. Most tax revenues were spent in the North and West. One reason the South was in such a disadvantageous position during the Civil War was the lack of development in the South before the war.

6. The other cause that rallied the North [and actually was a larger motivator through the war itself than slavery] was the preservation of the Union. I collect old books. They reflect what the culture believed at the time of the writing. I have a textbook on Constitutional Law, written at, and used by, Harvard University in 1850. Funny thing; they were teaching that the states were sovereign and had the right to secede.

This was not a new train of thought in New England. During the War of 1812, the state of Massachusetts called a convention that the other New England legislatures sent official delegations to [see "Hartford Convention"]. They drew up a series of demands for changes to the Constitution that would emphasize states rights, limit the powers of the Federal government, and threatened to secede and sign a separate peace with Britain.

The fathers and grandfathers of the New Englanders who were insistent that the South did not have the right to secede and that the Union had to be preserved at all costs, had tried to do so themselves.

7. The proximate cause of secession was the election of 1860. Yeah, the South feared Lincoln. Given the platform of the Republican Party, it may not have been unreasonable. But the key was the Congressional results. The Republicans and a couple of allied minor parties had an absolute veto proof majority in both Houses. The South was literally at the mercy of the North, and had no reason to expect any of that mercy or tolerance of any aspect of their existence from the North after the last few decades of open political warfare.

Slavery was a factor, but in reality not the over-riding factor in the outbreak of the Civil War. The vast majority of Southern soldiers did not own slaves. There were free black Confederate regiments. Yankees were as racist about blacks as Southerners. Ulysses S. Grant and his wife Julia owned 5 slaves in Illinois. And slavery was not completely legally abolished in the North until December 6, 1865 [ratification of the XIII Amendment].

The country was already split. Two cultures, two views of the nature of government, two economies, and one side being the involuntary source of the funding of the other’s efforts to make political war on them. Any of that sound familiar?

#36 Dwight

“Need”, or “want” a Civil War? боже мой ! I am an old man. Probably would not survive the rigors of combat, and being politically incorrect and more than passing vocal I definitely not survive any period of occupation by TWANLOC or an action by their equivalent of Quantrill’s Raiders. I have children and a large extended family. In a civil war with hostile populations so intermixed, I will lose an awful lot. No one knows who will win in a Civil War, and usually the ideals of both sides are betrayed in the end.

Being old, I have experience in reading situations. I also have decades of study of history and of political science and of active involvement in politics. I may well be wrong. Age and experience can more easily equal senility and not infallibility. But I calls them as I sees them.

Recognizing something that is taking place in front of you is not equivalent to “wanting” or “needing” it to happen. And those who choose not recognize it, if it is real; do not alter the reality of what is taking place.

We are in a “Cold Civil War”, and have been in it for several decades. The rule of law and the Constitution hangs by a thread. And if we fail to throw off the shackles of TWANLOC politically in November; their actions are going to guarantee a rising temperature. If someone can rationally argue otherwise, I welcome it.

And Ms. Turner, if we are at war, we will have to put away the mindset of peace if we are to survive.

But the North with its huge factories at Lowell and scores of other places WAS buying southern cotton. Where else were they going to get it? That interdependence kept the northern cotton magnates on the side of all the (in retrospect) “craven” compromises, to keep the nation together and that raw cotton coming. The enforcement of the Fugitive Slave Law: escaped slave Anthony Burns being returned by Federal marshalls from Boston to his owner is what finally radicalized Amos Lawrence, the cotton king of New England.

In retrospect, one can pontificate on the “craven compromises,” but they seemed better than secession or civil war at the time.

Can you be more specific about what your 1850 law books say about secession of states?

When George Washington was president, there were only 3 million americans (1/100th as many as there are now). Much easier for a group that size to get along (though there were plenty of bitter and divisive debates then as well).

I doubt that a nation of 300 million people can co-exist peacefully for long. I’ll be surprised if the United States sees it tri-centennial. We might be far better off if we split into smaller groups, like maybe 50, maybe loosely tied together for trade and common protection, maybe in some sort of federal system, but otherwise independent.

And the strongest military, by far, in the world, goes where? Each state gets to keep the nukes…. IN that state? Hell, maybe we would be better off with a role where we did not have to be the world’s policeman, but there would definitely be shrinking pains.

We are our own worst enemy, I’ll give you that. But when has that ever not been true of humanity?

I submit the thesis that you (Ms. Turner) are misreading the divide in America right now, especially that side that is dubbed “the conservative right”. The “conservative right” of today, in general, is what used to be called “liberalism”, at least in our America; that is, the natural rights of humanity as outlined in the Constitution, of liberty, equality under the law, and the pursuit (notice i say “pursuit”) of happiness. Nowhere in the Constitution is “equality of result” guaranteed, because those men who wrote the Constitution were fully cognizant of the fact that human beings are born flawed, and should possess the means to overcome their flaws, but by birth or circumstance, may not. That is, the Founding Fathers were realistic about basic human nature. Perhaps in our 21st century incarnation, we’ve lost sight of that to our detriment.

Despise our enemies? Maybe not. We are all human, after all. Recognize their weaknesses and their wrong-headed obsessions? Most assuredly.

I agree that we are to love our enemies. Love, as the Apostle Paul wrote, is never haughty or rude, nor boastful or proud. That’s why Ronald Reagan and Margaret Thatcher were so confounding to their enemies; they always seemed so placidly cool when confronted by left-leaning journalists.

Because we love, we can’t allow the left to destroy themselves and their children, as well as the rest of the country, with their ideology. Leftist ideology is based on the ideas of scarcity, covetousness and death. Thanks to the left we have subsidized abortions, coddling of Islamists, and God forbid, rationed healthcare. As Shakespeare said, we need to be cruel to be kind. So let’s be happy warriors and smile as we eviscerate our opponents’ lies.

The Left wanted to replace God with Government. They believe Government can be in the role of God, substantially deciding and dictating everyones’ lives and resources for the greater good, and judging them accordingly to the laws of Government.

The problem is that Government is made up of fallible, politically biased, ideologically driven and easily corruptible people, directed by a fallible, power-hungry Leader elected by the people within Government (and not by the little people under Government).

this conservative strives to regard all wouldbe tyrants (big and small) with a true love, with the agape love of our Lord Jesus. having studied the his Word, the actions of statists (fallen human nature) are completely understood and predictable in every way. i fight the same tendencies in myself everyday.

God’s love, of course, has nothing to do with human regard, respect or “fondness.” it also has nothing to do with eros or lust. it is a love that puts another’s welfare completely above onself. it is the complete denial of self when others are in need. that is the love that Jesus demonstrated for us on the cross. are attempts to mimick are “as filthy rags” in comparison, but as believers, we must try.

btw, leftists are no mystery to us, we know exactly what they will do and why they have to do it, and i say, without any emotion but love and forgiveness, the best love i can show them (including my many leftist family members) is to completely confound their creeping and constant efforts to enslave us all (including them).

Sadly many democrats today are democrats who’d rather not be Americans any lomger. I can name a few congresswoman who Im positive swear allegiance not to the U.S.A but to the democratic party. Leaving the republican party the american party.

I am just starting “Gods and Generals.” If we are close to a Civil War, I would like to review Shaara’s take on the run up to our big one. Some people here talk as if we need a Civil War, they want a Civil War. Can they be serious, or is it just one more example of how cheap words are?

Well said Janine and I take it in the spirit that it was given. It is always better to try and reason with your enemies than to fight them but sometimes the fight is necessary to protect freedom. The real problem with the far left is that they are willing to use force to get their way. In that case self defense is a virtue as Japan and Germany found out to their sorrow.

There is a lot of hate and anger in the land. What I see are a lot of people who have tried to get along and reach honest compromises, but feel they have been rejected; and are for the most part groping toward a reasonable way to deal with the problem with any real violence a recognizable evil, and surrender to far left statism an unconscionable evil.

“a fundamental factor prevailed in 1787 that is sorely missing in 2012 — allegiance to the survival of the United States of America and the republic for which she stands”

I would have to disagree with you on that statement, Janine – I do believe that allegiance to the survival of America exists – but only in the hearts of conservatives. What the left wants is decidedly NOT America. The democratic party was hijacked a long time ago. They want some kind of Europe and have never been satisfied with being Americans. We are back at the same sort of point that triggered the American Revolution – those who wanted a king and those who wanted to be free. I don’t want government as my king, and I want to be free. I don’t want to be told by my government that because I believe in fiscal responsibility, in limited government, free markets, the 2nd Amendment, GOD and personal responsibility that I am a damned terrorist or soon to be terrorist.

Sorry, but far too many on the right do not understand that we are in a war, and it was declared a very long time ago against us and our American freedoms and principles. If you fail to recognize your enemy, you will lose.

I read this piece with a considerable degree of anguish. It’s both on the mark and fatally wide of it, at the same time.

Yes, despising one’s enemy is generally unwise, at least in actual warfare. It leads to atrocities and forgetfulness about one’s own moral obligations. The combatant must take care to remember that his opponent is a human being acting on his best knowledge and values, even as he pulls the trigger to launch the round that will slay him. No other attitude can turn victory into peace.

BUT…

In what war have we had to deal with enemies that continuously rubbed up against us, in our own squares and halls, and that felt no compunction about accusing us of all the lowest desires and vilest intentions known to Man?

In what war have our enemies succeeded in attacking us at home, and defending their assaults, both rhetorical and physical, on peaceable persons as justified by our political positions?

In what war have our enemies made it so perfectly plain that they consider us the embodiment of evil; that they will shout us down in any and every venue; that they will divide our children from us however they can; that their aim is not merely to prevail over us but to eliminate us?

This is contemptible from every imaginable vantage point, and the only way a decent man could possibly respond to it is with reciprocal contempt.

The time to show clemency is after victory has been achieved. A victor can afford magnanimity; we, who are still beleaguered, fighting desperately for our ideals, in many cases for our personal reputations, and in a terrifying few for our lives, livelihoods, and property, can only stand and fight. If despising our enemy will help to energize us, so be it. Perhaps we’ll feel more generous after we’ve prevailed. But until then: no prisoners, no quarter, and no mercy!

Janine, I definitely agree, but what about all those folks who NEED an enemy, the ones who need something which they can call evil and fight against? It is the lens through which they view the world. Both the left and the right are well-stocked with such folks and the PJM contingent has responded long and loud here. They, like the poor, will always be with us, and although they do not define all of reality for us, they are a significant part of the reality that we live with. I would like to think that I can pull a trigger when I have to, but do not live my life just waiting to pull a trigger. x% of humanity apparently does. So it goes.

And I should distinguish between the trigger pullers and the “woe unto the wicked” speakers, because they are not necessarily the same demographic. One clearly sees and denounces evil, the other is dying to smite the evil, because they are into smiting, sheep dog smiting, or smiting in general. We really are a diverse people.

Che Guevara was an eager trigger puller. In his time of being the Commandante of Castro’s political prison, after the revolution, he personnally pulled the trigger over 1500 times, on bound and kneeling men, in the back of the head.

Interesting comment. Allow me to offer this perspective: all societies and cultures need a ‘warrior class’ to survive. If there had been no Sparta there would be no Greece. That’s no less true of the conservative culture and it’s battle with the marxist left.

And Just as I’m sure Athens viewed Sparta with disdain, you apparently hold those of us in the ‘Conservative Warrior Class’ in disdain. That’s OK. we understand that. To borrow the words of Col. David Grossman, the sheep always resent the sheepdog.

Some of us understand that we are engaged right now in the metaphorical equivalent of the Battle of Thermopylae.

The reactions I have read to this plea for loving thine enemy are swift and to the point. We do have a set of enemies that wish to change the nation into their image of what it should be. Those of you who declare that they are ready to resist these misguided progressive souls, and say so, are heartening to one who has been fighting a lonely battle in the midst of the enemy! I welcome that there are still many articulate friends of the Constitution and Conservatism writ large, who will stand up and fight for the nation and its founding principles. Bravo!

For American politics it should not be “You should never despise your enemies.” It should be “You should never despise your opponents.” The inability to differentiate between enemies and opponents is a great mistake.

Having the strength to think of your opponent as your opponent gives you an upper hand when advancing your cause, for hate does not lend itself to sound decisions. The desire to improve the country is replaced with the the desire to defeat the other guys.

Janine,
I have to disagree. While I would agree with a statement that we should not hate our fellow citizens, despite and its softer cousin detestation are a perfectly reasonable response.
Hate is an unreasoning emotion. It lends itself to extreme responses that may not be justifiable. It also is fairly well self-perpetuating until the emotional fuel sustaining it is exhausted.
In contrast despite is a considered response to an adversary. While the reasoning behind hate is usually reduced “their evil,” despite is categorizable by it’s reaction to specific positions which can be elucidated in a more detailed form. Since despite is a response to a reasoning process it can evolve and even ameliorate over time as the adversarial positions change.
For most of my life I was an Democratic leaning Independent. I am now a staunch Republican. My evolution from center left to a fairly hard right has its genesis in the despite in which I now hold the Democratic party. This despite was generated by the acceptance of the hard left’s rampant anti-semitism, racism, complete lack of self-responsibility, et cetra. If the Democratic party were to repudiate these positions, in a forceful and convincing manner, I would be willing to consider movement back to the center. If I were to simply hate the Democratic party for its misdeeds in these arenas, there would be no conceivable method by which I would be willing to modify my position.
Therefore despite is a good state in which to hold the opposition. Constantly question and constantly repudiate those things which you consider anathema.

I came away from reading this article with this description running through my mind…clap trap.

We are at war for the soul and continuation of our country as a Republic. Anyone who wants to change this to a dictatorial socialist country is my enemy. We have only one recourse and that is to defeat the enemy of our country. In our schools, in our state governments, in the Federal government and anywhere else they’ve taken control. Defeat does not mean kill it means to overcome their influence to the point it is no longer effective. It has nothing to do with hate but it does have to do with winning the battle and you don’t win by accepting what they are saying or doing. The writer of this article has misunderstood why we have chosen sides. I didn’t choose to be a conservative because I value the name or being it, more than I value being a citizen of the United States. I picked it because it’s the name of those who are ready to do battle against the enemies of all of us, even those who say they want socialism.

“If ever a time should come when vain and aspiring men shall possess the highest seats in Government, our country will stand in need of experienced patriots to prevent its ruin.” – Samuel Adams 1776

Ms. Turner, that was an eloquent, lucid, well-thought out expose on exactly how we conservatives got into this mess in the first place! Sincere negotiations and artful compromise are only possible when dealing with an HONEST BROKER. The democrats/liberals/progressives/marxists/socialists (hell, they’re all one in the same now) of today are not honest brokers, madam. They will lie, cheat, steal and even kill (Agent Brian Terry and thousands of innocent Mexican nationals) to achieve their agenda goals. There is no ‘deal’ possible now, Ms. Turner. The aforementioned anti-American domestic enemies of our nation need to be DEFEATED, not compromised with and allowed to stay in any position of influence within a free government of, by and for the People. If you had any real knowledge of the type of man George Washington was, you would certainly agree that he is rolling in his grave because of what we conservatives have allowed to happen to our great nation through our decades-long ambivalence and desire to ‘get along’ with those who do not have the country’s best interests at heart, rather their own. I will be fair and say that even JFK is probably just as mortified as Geo. Washington; once upon a time, democrats actually loved our country too. But, those days ended when statesmen like Zell Miller left and scumbags like John Kerry arrived. Regardless, Ms. Turner, the truth is going to come out about Fast and Furious, Solyndra, the national security leaks and many other examples of what constitutes today’s Democratic Party. The chips will fall where they may and this administration AND ITS ENABLERS AND PROTECTORS BOTH IN GOVERNMENT AND THE MEDIA will be called to account for their crimes and misdeeds. Now THAT is something George Washington would be proud of.

President Washington clearly demonstrated his understanding of the need for compromise when he appointed Thomas Jefferson (strict constitutionalist) to his cabinet as well as Alexander Hamilton (staunch federalist), even though the two men intensely disliked each other. But, his actions during the Whiskey Rebellion starkly illustrate Washington’s abhorrence for any individual or group that chose to usurp the authority of the Constitution or the Republic. Today’s ‘whiskey rebels’ take their fights to federal courts that have been stacked with activist, “progressive” judges that wish to rewrite the laws from the bench. George Washington would never dream of allowing today’s “progressives” tear apart our constitution, against the will of the people, through federal courts when they cannot win through the people’s vote.

We sure could use another George Washington today….He would kick President Obama’s butt all the way down Pennsylvania Avenue and out of any position of influence ever again. Oh Lord, I guess now I’m a racist just like everybody else who does not walk lock-step with the President’s radical left wing agenda…..

What your missing is that progressivism is the road to serfdom and tyranny. That is what we’re up against. It’s time for you and millions of others to wake up to that fact and speak plainly about it. Nicely if you have to, but firmly and with conviction. I’m wondering what advice you’d consider having given to the prisoners in the gulag after their property was fully redistributed, their cities and farms destroyed and families murdered while their opponents decided that reason was just a petty bourgeoisie nuisance to be set aside and replaced by a new, higher logic that only could be divined by a new nomenclatura. Let’s just be clear who the heartless cutthroats are here, please.

As for conservatives, we actually offer clear reasons for why progressives failures surround and engulf us as well as offering sound, time tested solutions, grounded in individual liberty, for returning the country to a path of prosperity. And in response we’re told that if we’d only taken the full measure of their wisdom all would be right. If only we’d spent twice as much on tarp, spent twice the amount on stimulus, borrowed 10 trillion instead of five or six, we’d have triggered such an economic renaissance that the world would worship us. There is no end to this stupidity and only one response when dealing with people who care nothing for the efforts of those who create the wealth that they scheme to steal and use to empower and enrich themselves and their ilk while feigning good intentions for the rest of humanity. That response is NO! I’ll even say it nicely. In fact, millions of us will, this November.

With all due respect, I would refer you to David Swindle’s article on PJ.

Reasoning with a statist is a waste of time.

Obsessively hating them only allows them to get in your head and disrupt your life. If and when they finally go too far, and real shooting civil war comes, hatred will be an unwanted distraction from the task at hand.

A very nice, very American sentiment that applies nicley to political differences.

It is however, a vast oversimplification that neither applies, nor should apply in all cases. To make this easier I’ll go back in history a little to illustrate my point:
- in WW2 both the Nazi’s (particularly SS) and Japanese Imperial Army committed unspeakable attrocities and crimes against humanity. It is right to despise the truly despicable.
- on an individual basis, why not despise Ted Bundy or Charles Manson?